Ad Lib Posted February 18, 2011 Share Posted February 18, 2011 Its a good question. That's why it baffles me that so many people on the right dislike smaller, more local, government, and prefer to worship at the altar of the Big Great British State. Very odd. I would absolutely love it if real power was given to a local level. Holyrood isn't very local though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ad Lib Posted February 18, 2011 Share Posted February 18, 2011 ^^^ doesn't understand what a layered structure is. You are aware that Westminster can still legislate on pretty much anything in Scotland, aren't you? The Scotland Act just devolves shared competence and reserves several specifics. It is only by convention that Holyrood retains de facto complete control over areas like health and education, issuing Sewel motion to Westminster when they cop out and ask them to deal with something. The announcements on the way the NHS is run down south clearly do matter under the current set-up because the funding element is used to calculated the Scottish block grant. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
vikingTON Posted February 18, 2011 Share Posted February 18, 2011 You are aware that Westminster can still legislate on pretty much anything in Scotland, aren't you? The Scotland Act just devolves shared competence and reserves several specifics. It is only by convention that Holyrood retains de facto complete control over areas like health and education, issuing Sewel motion to Westminster when they cop out and ask them to deal with something. So what you're saying is that administration and bureaucracy for Scotland in reserved areas is de facto held at Holyrood. There is therefore no extra layer of government in those areas. It is an alternative 'layer': or just a different form of government. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Reynard Posted February 18, 2011 Share Posted February 18, 2011 I would absolutely love it if real power was given to a local level. Holyrood isn't very local though. I would too. As long as we get to bin the EU ,Westminster , and Holyrood. One tier of wankers arseing everything up ismore than enough. Having four tiers of the c***s is just taking the piss. I was delighted when we finally got rid of the horrific regional councils which were an unnecessary layer of government only to see it replaced by a f**k up over expensive shower of wankers in Embra. We had a brief moment when we didnt have at least one needless tier of government. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kiwififer Posted February 18, 2011 Share Posted February 18, 2011 I would too. As long as we get to bin the EU ,Westminster , and Holyrood. One tier of wankers arseing everything up ismore than enough. Having four tiers of the c***s is just taking the piss. I was delighted when we finally got rid of the horrific regional councils which were an unnecessary layer of government only to see it replaced by a f**k up over expensive shower of wankers in Embra. We had a brief moment when we didnt have at least one needless tier of government. I'm going to try an experiment. Can Reynard actually say something nice about the EU? I say no. Anyone up for a bet? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ad Lib Posted February 18, 2011 Share Posted February 18, 2011 So what you're saying is that administration and bureaucracy for Scotland is de facto held at Holyrood. There is therefore no extra layer of government in those areas. It is therefore not an extra layer, but an alternative 'layer'. Or just a different form of government. At no point did I say there as an additional layer of government (but there are certainly multiple layers of bureaucracy given the continued functions of the Scotland Office). I was challenging your factually inaccurate claim that the announcements on foundation hospitals down South "have no bearing on the Scottish system whatsoever". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
vikingTON Posted February 18, 2011 Share Posted February 18, 2011 I was challenging your factually inaccurate claim that the announcements on foundation hospitals down South "have no bearing on the Scottish system whatsoever". In what way do they have a direct administrative bearing on the Scottish system? I'm using careful words here to pre-empt what i suspect will be three pages of mewling about the Barnett Forumla and budget constraints associated. Westminster announces foundation hospitals: English NHS gets foundation hospitals, Scotland doesn't. It is also not an 'opt-out' option but completely irrelevant to Scottish political discourse. Oh and an important housekeeping point, when challenging a small part of a post, highlight it. Otherwise you're challenging every claim made in said post. And are wrong about all. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Reynard Posted February 18, 2011 Share Posted February 18, 2011 I'm going to try an experiment. Can Reynard actually say something nice about the EU? I say no. Anyone up for a bet? Absolutely nothing whatsoever. It is one gigantic piece of socialist shite. Full of johnny foreigner eurolefty c***s and run by fucking wanks. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Reynard Posted February 18, 2011 Share Posted February 18, 2011 In what way do they have a direct administrative bearing on the Scottish system? I'm using careful words here to pre-empt what i suspect will be three pages of mewling about the Barnett Forumla and budget constraints associated. Westminster announces foundation hospitals: English NHS gets foundation hospitals, Scotland doesn't. It is also not an 'opt-out' option but completely irrelevant to Scottish political discourse. Oh and an important housekeeping point, when challenging a small part of a post, highlight it. Otherwise you're challenging every claim made in said post. And are wrong about all. Its just a merger of the old regional councils. It was a bunch of sad talentless socialist p***ks too. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ad Lib Posted February 18, 2011 Share Posted February 18, 2011 In what way do they have a direct administrative bearing on the Scottish system? I'm using careful words here to pre-empt what i suspect will be three pages of mewling about the Barnett Forumla and budget constraints associated. Westminster announces foundation hospitals: English NHS gets foundation hospitals, Scotland doesn't. It is also not an 'opt-out' option but completely irrelevant to Scottish political discourse. Oh and an important housekeeping point, when challenging a small part of a post, highlight it. Otherwise you're challenging every claim made in said post. And are wrong about all. Ah, yes, because "direct administrative bearing" is exactly the same as "have no <oh look, the words direct and administrative are conspicuously absent> bearing on the Scottish system whatsoever" As for your housekeeping point, I don't give a shit if you can't deduce that to which I was objecting. It's not my problem Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
vikingTON Posted February 18, 2011 Share Posted February 18, 2011 Ah, yes, because "direct administrative bearing" is exactly the same as "have no <oh look, the words direct and administrative are conspicuously absent> bearing on the Scottish system whatsoever" The system (a key word you skimmed over) is entirely unaffected. Therefore I am entirely correct. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ad Lib Posted February 18, 2011 Share Posted February 18, 2011 The system (a key word you skimmed over) is entirely unaffected. Therefore I am entirely correct. The presence of the word system at best revives administration (although even that is on shaky semantics ground). The omission of direct is not cured by anything. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pink Freud Posted February 18, 2011 Share Posted February 18, 2011 Absolutely nothing whatsoever. It is one gigantic piece of socialist shite. Full of johnny foreigner eurolefty c***s and run by fucking wanks. No, it's worse than that. Its a dumping ground for talentless politicians of every hue, and those like Farage who are too outspoken to survive in national politics. It's an abomination of a clusterfuck of the mediocre and the mental. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
vikingTON Posted February 18, 2011 Share Posted February 18, 2011 The presence of the word system The fact that the system is unchanged proves my point. Nothing more need be said. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ad Lib Posted February 18, 2011 Share Posted February 18, 2011 The fact that the system is unchanged proves my point. Nothing more need be said. Except it's not a "fact" at all. Your omission of the word "direct" and your use of the word "whatever" opens you entirely to the reality that spending decisions such as those on foundation hospitals have an effect on the Scottish system by increasing or decreasing the Scottish bloc grant with which to provide services north of the border. For your point to be evidentially valid, let alone factual, you would need to present a comparative model: 1. Where NHS spending levels in England had zero impact on the Scottish block grant 2. The levels of spending on Scottish health services was the same as is now If you cannot provide such a model, you cannot say with any authority that it is a "fact" that "the system is unchanged" or that it "proves [your] point". Edit: another example which can blow your myth that Scottish systems are unaffected by corresponding spending commitments at a Westminster level is in University funding. The impending cuts to direct government funding of English Universities has Barnett consequentials. Fast forward a few months and Holyrood had to respond by increasing fees for international students and divert other money from elsewhere in order to balance the higher education books. If you had been honest enough to include the word "direct" in your initial post, we wouldn't be arguing. Your failure to do so makes what you said wrong. Whether that was what you meant is irrelevant. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ForzaDundee Posted February 18, 2011 Share Posted February 18, 2011 For any nationalists I'd look at joining this mailing list - http://tinyurl.com/ALBAplc Only recently started but already had a mass email complaint to the BBC on the their skewed perspective on the release of Al Megrahi. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kiwififer Posted February 18, 2011 Share Posted February 18, 2011 Absolutely nothing whatsoever. It is one gigantic piece of socialist shite. Full of johnny foreigner eurolefty c***s and run by fucking wanks. I win Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Reynard Posted February 18, 2011 Share Posted February 18, 2011 I win I let you Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Reynard Posted February 18, 2011 Share Posted February 18, 2011 No, it's worse than that. Its a dumping ground for talentless politicians of every hue, and those like Farage who are too outspoken to survive in national politics. It's an abomination of a clusterfuck of the mediocre and the mental. No. Nothing is worse than a heap of socialist shite. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
xbl Posted February 18, 2011 Author Share Posted February 18, 2011 Come on Reynard, you can do better than that! You've gone all Dickson today. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.